NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Melvin L. Rosenbloom, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY, AIRLINE AND STEAMSHIP
CLERKS, FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND
STATION EMPLOYES
MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood (GL-6739) that:
1. Carrier violated the Clerks' Agreement when, on October 22
and 23, 1968, Mr. Glenn Toler, Transportation Inspector (Carrier
Officer) performed routine clerical work in the Sargent Yard and
office at Memphis, Tennessee, of tracing cars without bills and bills
without cars, for sufficient information to make out waybills to move
cars, which was in violation of Rules 1, 2, 3, 5, 25, 45 and related
rules of the Clerks' Agreement.
2. Carrier shall be required to pay claimant Clerk J. T. Ransome,
October 22, 1968 - 10 hours at punitive rate
of $4.95 per hour amount $49.50
October 23, 1968 - 91/2 hours at punitive rate
of $4.95 per hour amount $47.03
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: On the claim dates, October 22
and 23, 1968, the Carrier maintained a clerical force in the Sargent Yard and
Leewood Yard at Memphis, Tennessee, as follows:
(Chart not reproduced)
Clerk James T. Ransoms is listed on the seniority roster of the Memphis Terminal, Offices of Assistant Superintendent, Station and Yards, Mechanical and Supply Department, Class A B-, B employes, with a Class A
seniority date of September 16, 1942.
On the claim dates, Mr. Ransoms was regularly assigned to position of
Utility Clerk (106) at Memphis, a seven day per week assignment, Monday
5. The clerical employes at Memphis contend this work was reserved
exclusively to clerks and that it was a violation of the Agreement when an
officer engaged in activities incidental to expediting the movement of loads.
The Employes filed the instant claim which was progressed through the
usual channels on the property.
6. Carrier declined the Employes' claim based upon the fact that the
clerks' Agreement violated when officers determine names of consignees,
routing, etc. This claim was declined by C'arrier's Director of Labor Relations
as follows in a letter dated April 23, 1969:
"April 23, 1969
D 205-4?°1
Mr. F. D. Lupton
General Chairman - Clerks
1208 Continental Bldg.
'161.5 Olive St.
St. Louis, Mo. 63108
Dear Sir:
Please refer to your letter of February 27, 1969, file 7478, appealing claim of Clerk J. 1'. Ransoms for ten hours at the time and
one-half rate for October 22, 7968 and nine hours at the time and
one-half rate for October 23, 1968, when it is alleged an official performed work at Memphis which is alleged to be rer,erved exclusively
to clerks.
The facts as we understand them in this case are that a clerical
employs prepared a list of cars on hand without bills and that the
transportation inspector exercised a managerial prerogative of developing by which he was able to issue instructions conosraing the
billing and disposition of these ears. After the transportation inspector developed the information, the instructions were given to clerical
employes at Memphis, who prepared waybills and routed cars to
their proper destination.
There is neither practice nor agreement provision which prohibits
an official performing service of this nature; in fact, it is an integral
part of his duties and responsibilities as an official.
In view of these facts, claim is without merit and is respectfully
declined.
Yours truly,
/s/ 0. B. Sayers"
OPINION OF BOARD:
The facts herein are not in dispute. On the claim
dates Carrier's Transportation Inspector, an officer of the company, worked
ten hours and nine and one-half hours, respectively, performing most of the
routine clerical duties shown on the bulletin for Utility Clerk-"No Bill" (No.
106). The Transportation Inspector obtained a list of no-bill cars on hand,
went intro the yard and opened cars to determine tire origin or destination
of the cars, and telephoned ,offices of Carrier as well as other lines and
shippers for the purpose of securing information sufficient to make out way.
18438 9
bills. All of these functions are included in the bulletin of Position No. 106.
Claimant contends that Carrier violated the Scope Rule and other rules by
permitting its officer to engage in this work. Claimant further alleges that
such activity by excepted employes has become a yearly ritual during the
fall when soybean movement is heavy.
Carrier defends by asserting that its officer was merely "developing
information by which he was able to issue instructions." We do not agree.
The Transportation Inspector went far beyond managerial prerogative when
he spent full days performing routine work assigned by bulletin to and
normally performed by a clerical employe. We adopt the reasoning expressed
on this subject by Referee Ives in Award 15461.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the parties waived oral hearing;
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved June 21, 1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was violated.
Claim sustained.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: E. A. Killeen
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 12th day of March 1971.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, Ill.
Printed in U.S.A.
18438 10